The folly of taking back question papers

Nowadays many teachers in many universities around the world take back question papers at the end of any examination. The Business Faculty of Dhaka University also did not allow for a decade the admission seekers to take question papers with them. But now they allow it after a long period of discussion with the concerned people in this connection. Other faculties like science, arts and social science also allow. In many universities in Australia, the UK, the USA and Japan, students cannot take away  question papers of even midterm or final examinations (although some of them put these online later).
ARGUMENTS: They put the following arguments in favour of what they do. If question papers are allowed to be taken away, the students become question-centric; they do not read texts and reference books. Secondly, teachers can repeat questions with some modifications. Thirdly, university teachers are burdened with increased pressure of teaching, so they follow short-cut methods, i.e., prepare a question bank and use questions from there. So, they do not allow the students to take away question papers. Fourthly, new technology helps this process.  
This scribe thinks the reasons given above are very weak. There are questions, exercises, illustrations, problems and cases presented in textbooks. If they make students question-centric and if this is bad for students, the textbooks should not have included questions at the end of each chapter. Importantly, in higher education there are continuous changes in syllabuses, course contents, ideas and knowledge. Therefore, there will always be new questions and patterns.
EPISTEMIC BELIEFS OR JUSTIFICATION: There are many epistemic justifications for allowing students to take away question papers with them. Firstly, students have paid for it when they registered for examinations. Secondly, seating for exams is only a part of learning; there is always room for comparison, revision of belief, better ideas and better answers. Third, they can correct themselves. Fourth, they can reflect on questions and understand the marks obtained. Fifth, allowing students to take away question papers allows the students to compare, discuss and evaluate their ideas among themselves. Sixth, it helps recheck. Seventh, they need it, if they sit again for exams. Eighth, a question paper is an evidence that the student has appeared in examinations. Parents can take notice of that.
THEORIES: Kenneth Arrow in his Essays in the Theory of Risk-Bearing (1974) argued for evaluation of alternative social possibilities (social choice). Social choice mechanisms aggregate preferences and behaviours of individual members of society to produce a social welfare function. Arrow's impossibility theorem which led to the social choice theory, states that even there is no restriction on either individual preferences or neutrality of the constitution to feasible alternatives, there exists no social choice rule that satisfies a set of plausible requirements. It shows that the majority voting may fail to yield a stable outcome. So, any wise social choice has to depend on reasons, ethics, freedom and justice, from which duties and obligations of human beings are derived. Amartya Sen, in his Nobel Lecture in 1998, suggested the need for information widening, broadening and information enrichment. Theory of competition is also relevant here. Transparency, disclosure, right to information and equity suggest that students should take question papers with them. Importantly, according to the theory of knowledge in philosophy, knowledge is a belief where there are no overriding beliefs or reasons to the contrary. It means beliefs should be better, justified and reasoned out. This is called epistemology in philosophy. The reasons and arguments for giving the question papers to students are stronger than the reasons and arguments for taking away those from the students.
SELF-INTEREST AND IMPERFECTION OF KNOWLEDGE: Man makes mistakes for two reasons: uncontrolled self-interest and imperfection of knowledge. When one does something in self interest, he knows that he is wrong but still does it. But in the event of imperfection of knowledge, he does not know that he is wrong. In case of self-interest, little or no evaluation is done but in case of imperfection of knowledge, evaluation is done but it is insufficient, all the evidences are not looked into and there is the lack of farsightedness. Stronger justification is ignored for weaker justification. When there is self-interest, behaviour is guided by financial and some other tangible benefits. For example, a CEO of a company may take undue benefits, politicians may openly seek to propagate the interests of a particular group, a trade body may ask for tax cut for its products. But intangible benefits like social status, power, control over others and self-glory are linked to imperfection of knowledge. These self-interests and imperfection of knowledge are, however, universal. But the hope is that we can reduce our self-interest behaviours by reducing our imperfection of knowledge. And we can reduce our imperfection of knowledge by widening and broadening information, by facilitating a competitive environment, by searching for epistemic justification and arranging for justice and freedom. Giving question papers to students is consistent with the above requirements, whereas restrictions hamper their consistency.
LIBERAL EDUCATION: Liberal education also known as liberal arts (not liberal policy) and age of enlightenment is characterised by open and equal access to opportunities and resources. Education is an open system, where free flow of information, ideas and knowledge is a precondition (except some intellectual property rights). It is a philosophy of education to empower individuals with broader knowledge and transferable skills, and a stronger sense of values, ethics and civic engagement, and it is more a way of studying than a specific course in a field of study. It emphasises development of intellectual ability more than technical and professional skills alone. Taking back question papers from students is a disrespect for students and a lack of trust in them. This attitude in no way attests to it that students are considered responsible citizens. On the other hand, giving question papers to students (who have paid for this) is a humanistic approach based on valid reasons. Keeping the question bank private and secret is noncompetitive, according to the theory of competition.
KNOWLEDGE NEVER EXISTS IN A CONCENTRATED FORM BUT AS DISPERSED BITS: Frederick Hayek argued in the American Economic Review (1945) that knowledge never exists in a concentrated form but as dispersed bits. This imperfection of knowledge is universal in all spheres of life, in all times and at all places. Also, there are contradictions among different disciplines of beliefs and knowledge. Economics or any subject as a separate science is unrealistic and misleading, if taken as a guide to practice. It is one element, a very important element, in a more extensive study. Many religious beliefs are questioned by anthropology and sociology, many scientific developments are questioned by humanities and philosophy, many market economic behaviours are corrected by government regulations, and many business behaviours are simply guided by self-interests.
Here we need to continue the discussions. For epistemic behaviour anywhere, we need to assess and evaluate different beliefs at broader and multidisciplinary levels. Different groups of people may have different answers to a question or interpret it in different ways and there may be contradictions. Therefore, after examination, students need the question papers and discuss with others about the questions and find out better answers and better interpretations.
Dr. Dhiman Chowdhury is Professor of Accounting, Dhaka University.
dhiman_chowdhury@yahoo.com